Pain leaflet brittle bone disease
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Pain leaflet brittle bone disease

on

  • 668 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
668
Views on SlideShare
605
Embed Views
63

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

2 Embeds 63

http://www.wwwparentsagainstinjusticeorguk.com 62
http://parentsagainstinjustice.posterous.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Pain leaflet brittle bone disease Document Transcript

  • 1. PAIN Leaflet Brittle Bone DiseaseThe child with unexplained fractures By Dr Colin R Paterson, Department ofMedicine, University of DundeeUnexplained fractures may be the hallmark of all forms of brittle bone disease, explainsDr Colin PatersonDr Colin R Paterson is a former staff member of the Department of Medicine at the University ofDundee, Scotland.This article was previously published in the New Law Journal Expert witness supplement, NLJ Vol147 (1997) pages 648, 650 and 652The article is published here with the kind permission of the Editor of the New Law Journal.A recently reported judgment¹ has drawn attention to the frequent difficulty attending thediagnosis of the child with unexplained fractures. To many observers the failure of parents tocome up with an explanation for fractures found radiologically is ipso facto evidence for non-accidental injury; the lack of explanation must represent a failure to tell the truth about their ownor their partners actions. However, unexplained fractures in childhood are also the hallmark ofall forms of brittle bone disease and immense harm can be done to families by the inaccuratediagnosis of non-accidental injury.Much of our research over the last 25 years has related to the clinical aspects of the brittle bonediseases and we hold a database with details of over 1,300 patients. The best known of these isosteogenesis imperfecta which has a prevalence of about one in 10,000 in the United Kingdom.It is caused by abnormalities in collagen, the fibrous protein essential for the mechanicalstrength of bone. In turn, in most cases, this is now known to be caused by defects in the genesresponsible for collagen formation. Since collagen is abnormal in tissues other than bone,patients with osteogenesis imperfecta now have detectable features in addition fractures. Theseinclude blue or grey coloration of the sclerae (whites of the eyes), discoloration and fragility ofteeth, laxity of joints and an increased tendency to bruising or pinpoint bruises known aspetechiae. The bruising thought to reflect abnormalities in the collagen of small blood vessels.X-rays may show obvious abnormalities but in a majority of patients the appearances are normalat the time of the first few fractures; many of the abnormalities seen later reflect the fracturesand the immobilisation used in their treatment. In some cases osteogenesis imperfecta is passeddown from a parent to a child, but many cases are "sporadic" with no known family history.In most patients with osteogenesis imperfecta the diagnosis is made without undue difficulty onthe basis of the clinical signs, the fracture history or the family history. In a retrospective surveyof 802 known cases of osteogenesis imperfecta in the United Kingdom² we found that in 691 thediagnosis had been made confidently at birth or at the time of the first fracture. In 96 cases theparents were accused of non-accidental injury on at least one occasion. In 15 cases they had hadto contend with case conferences, care proceedings or criminal proceedings.Over the last 12 years we have identified a distinctive pattern in a minority of patients initiallythought to have osteogenesis imperfecta. In this variant, known as temporary brittle bonedisease³, the fractures are limited to the first year of life and, to a large extent, the first sixmonths of life. The fracture pattern is often distinctive with rib fractures and fractures at the endsof long bones (metaphyseal fractures) being frequent. These patients may have other featuressuch as vomiting [often projectile) and anaemia. While there s usually no family history offractures, there is a family history of joint laxity in about two thirds of cases. The cause of thedisorder is not yet known but it appears o be more common in twins and infants born before fullterm.
  • 2. It is not surprising that both osteogenesis imperfecta and temporary brittle bone disease are oftenconsidered in cases in which a child is found to have unexplained fractures. This articlesummarises a personal experience of cases in which the author prepared a report on the causes offractures and the likelihood of an underlying bone disease. Since these cases have been studiedover some 21 years it has been possible to follow up most of the children concerned forsubstantial periods.MethodsA database was prepared to include details of each child with information on the mode ofreferral, the diagnosis reached personally, the legal outcome and the details of follow-up.Additional clinical information was recorded in each case. The current report is restricted to 128patients living in the United Kingdom, in whom the major problem was the fractures.ResultsTable I shows the source of the referrals. Table II shows the diagnosis made by the author ineach case. While patients with temporary brittle bone disease were not recognised as such before1985, it was clear in retrospect that some patients seen earlier had this disorder. Two infants withan initial diagnosis of temporary brittle bone disease were later re-classified as osteogenesisimperfecta in the light of subsequent fractures.Of the 105 patients thought to have bone disorders the author provided evidence for careproceedings in 102. Of these infants the eventual outcome was that 78 were returned to theirparents (56 initially with conditions), three went to other family members and 21 were removedpermanently from their families. In three of these the parents had given up before formalproceedings. In seven families the parents separated; in three because one parent was blamed.Of the 33 children thought to have osteogenesis imperfecta 25 were returned to their parents.One died later with bronchopneumonia and multiple unexplained gastrointestinal problems. Theremaining patients have been followed up for between one and 18 years (total 136 patient-years,mean 5.6 years). There was no evidence of non-accidental injury in this period.Of the 65 children thought to have temporary brittle bone disease, 48 were returned to theirparents. Two died later; one with a cot death and one with late sequelae of birth injury; in neitherwas non-accidental injury postulated. In 43 of the remaining patients follow-up information wasavailable for between 1 and 11 years (total 248 patient years, mean 5.8 years). There was noevidence of non-accidental injury during this period.Table ISource of medico-legal referrals 1974-96Parents representatives 102Guardians ad litem 8Local authority 6Senior hospital staff 8General practitioners 3Police 1Total 128Table 2Diagnosis in 128 patients referred for the diagnosis of unexplained fracturesOsteogenesis imperfecta 33
  • 3. Temporary brittle bone disease 65Vitamin D deficiency rickets 5Scurvy (vitamin C deficiency) 1Hypophosphatasia* 1Accidental injury 9Unresolved/non-accidental injury 14Total 128* Hypophosphatasia is an uncommon heritable disorder of boneIn the whole group of 105 children thought to have bone disease the evidence was rejectedjudicially in 29 cases and formally accepted in 23. In the remaining cases there was no formalfinding for a variety of reasons, most commonly because rehabilitation of the child with thefamily was agreed without a hearing. Among the 65 patients thought to have temporary brittlebone disease this evidence was rejected in 18 and accepted in 11; in the remaining 36 patientsthere was no judicial finding. An analysis of the clinical findings in these three groups did notdemonstrate any differences in relation to a wide range of clinical features.DiscussionOver the last 20 years there has been some reduction in the number of new cases referred inwhich the diagnosis was osteogenesis imperfecta. Increased familiarity with the clinical featuresof this disorder has led to more frequent early diagnosis. In the past some of the cases referred tothe courts had classical features such as abnormal sclerae or teeth, or had a clearly positivefamily history which had not been sought.2However, retrospective study of confirmed cases of osteogenesis imperfecta continues todemonstrate that in a minority of patients the diagnosis was extremely difficult at the time of theearlier fractures. Since there may be long fracture-free periods in known cases it is possible to bemisled by the lack of subsequent fractures. In one particularly unfortunate family, in which theauthor was not involved legally, a child was taken into care at the age of 18 months after twofractures.A subsequent fracture did not occur for a further 18 months and the diagnosis of osteogenesisimperfecta was only made at the age of five years when she was returned to her mother.Retrospective study of the medical records and x-rays in this case revealed little evidence thatwould have helped to make the correct diagnosis at the time.While such difficult cases are uncommon they occur too frequently in the United Kingdom as awhole to allow for complacency. Our experience in the current series indicates that where adiagnosis of osteogenesis imperfecta is made and the child is returned to the parents no evidenceof subsequent non-accidental injury has been observed in 136 patient-years of follow up. In mostcases subsequent fractures occurred but mainly at ages at which the child was able to give aclear account of the events.In recent years it has become possible to identify abnormalities in collagen formation by cellsgrown in culture from excised samples of skin. With one approach it was claimed that suchabnormalities could be demonstrated in over 80 per cent of cases of osteogenesis, imperfecta 4.Such assays are time-consuming and labour-intensive; they are not widely available.In the past some reports have relied on such methods even in cases in which there was alreadyample clinical evidence of osteogenesis imperfecta. It is important that the limitations of suchtests are recognised.Temporary brittle bone disease is a much more controversial subject 5, 6, 7. Some of its featuresas reported by us are those that have been conventionally regarded as typical of non-accidental
  • 4. injury for the last thirty years 8 9. However, the evidence that these features, including rib fractures, and metaphyseal fractures are linked to non-accidental injury, is limited. In addition these fractures occur in a wide range of known bone disorders. For example, rib fractures occur spontaneously in known cases of ordinary osteogenesis imperfecta and may occur in utero. Metaphyseal fractures occur not only in osteogenesis imperfecta but also in at least five other bone disorders in the first year of life. There are four principal types of evidence that support the view that temporary brittle bone disease exists and does not represent misdiagnosed non-accidental injury. First the patients all show striking similarities in their clinical features, the types of fractures, the ages at which they occur, the other symptoms such as vomiting, the other signs such as enlarged fontanelles, and the family history observations. Were these infants not thought to have sustained non-accidental injury they would readily have been recognised as having a distinctive syndrome. Second, as with ordinary osteogenesis imperfecta, there is often a striking discrepancy between the fractures and other evidence of injury. In typical non-accidental injury bruises greatly outnumber fractures. In this disorder there may be over twenty fractures but reliable evidence that no superficial sign of injury was present at the time when the fractures occurred. Third, the same syndrome occurs in infants in whom non-accidental injury can be excluded with confidence, generally because the fractures occurred while the child was in hospital. Fourth, the evidence provided in this report emphasises that when these patients were returned to their parents no subsequent evidence of non-accidental injury has been identified in 248 patient- years of follow up. The premise underlying care proceedings is that abusive parents remain abusive and that there is substantial risk of further non-accidental injury if an abused child is returned. The follow up findings in this report support the view that in this small distinctive group of infants with unexplained fractures the diagnosis was not non-accidental injury. Dr Colin R Paterson, Department of Medicine, University of Dundee Notes ¹ Wall ] Re AB (child abuse: expert evidence) (1995)1 FLR 181. ² Paterson CR, McAllion SJ (1989) Osteogenesis imperfecta in the differential diagnosis of child abuse. BM] 299:1451. ³ Paterson CR, Burns ], McAllion S] (1993) Osteogenesis imperfecta: the distinction from child abuse and the recognition of a variant form. Amer J Med Genet 45:187. 4 Steiner RD, Pepin M, Byers PH (1996) Studies of collagen synthesis and structure in the differ- entiation of child abuse from osteogenesis imperfecta. J Pediatr 128: 542. 5 Smith R, Wynne JM, Hobbs C], Carty H (1995) Osteogenesis imperfecta, non-accidental injury and temporary brittle bone disease Arch Dis Childh 72:269. 6 Shaw DC, Hall CM, Carty H (1995) Osteogenesis imperfecta: the distinction from child abuse and the recognition of a variant form Amer J Med Genet 56:116. 7 Paterson CR Burns }, McAllion S] (1995) Osteogenesis imperfecta variant v child abuse: reply Amer J Med Genet 56: 117. 8 Carty HML (1993) Fractures caused by child abuse J Bone Joint Surg 75-B: 849. 9 Chapman S (1993) Recent advances in the radiology of child abuse Baill Clin Paediatr 1: 222. Acknowledgements I am indebted to Mrs E A Monk for preparing the databases used in this work, to Dr SL] McAllion and Ms ] Hoyal for advice on this article in draft and to the Cunningham Trustees for their support for our work on osteogenesis imperfecta.Extra informationFrom Paul Goldwater Health AU (via Wrennel) 4.6.10The significance of bruising in infants−−aforensic postmortem study
  • 5. Arch Dis Child published online June 3, 2010A I Ingham, N E Langlois and R W Byarddoi: 10.1136/adc.2009.177469